Re: [PATCH v3 02/25] include/block/block: split header into I/O and global state API

[Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito]

> > diff --git a/include/block/block-common.h b/include/block/block-common.h
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000000..4f1fd8de21
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/include/block/block-common.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,389 @@
> > +#ifndef BLOCK_COMMON_H
> > +#define BLOCK_COMMON_H
>
> As a new file, it probably deserves a copyright/license blurb copied
> from the file it is split out of.
>
> > diff --git a/include/block/block-global-state.h 
> > b/include/block/block-global-state.h
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000000..b57e275da9
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/include/block/block-global-state.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,263 @@
> > +#ifndef BLOCK_GLOBAL_STATE_H
> > +#define BLOCK_GLOBAL_STATE_H
>
> Likewise, here and in all other newly-split files in your series.

In general, as you might have seen, I kept the same copyright/license 
from the original file I split. But block.h seems to be the only header 
with no license.
> > +++ b/include/block/block.h
> > @@ -1,864 +1,9 @@
> >   #ifndef BLOCK_H
> >   #define BLOCK_H
>
> Oh. There wasn't one to copy from :( Well, now's as good a time to fix
> that as any.
So now the question is which one to use, because I see 2 different types 
of copyrights templates:

- long version copyright, used in block_int.h, blockjob_int.h and many 
others

/*
 * QEMU System Emulator block driver
 *
 * Copyright (c) 2003 Fabrice Bellard
 *
 * Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person 
obtaining a copy
[...]
 *
 * THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, 
EXPRESS OR
[...]
 */

- short version, used in block-backend.h and many others

/*
 * QEMU Block backends
 *
 * Copyright (C) 2014-2016 Red Hat, Inc.
 *
 * Authors:
 *  ....
 *
 * This work is licensed under the terms of the GNU LGPL, version 2.1
 * or later.  See the COPYING.LIB file in the top-level directory.
 */

Maybe since we are talking about block.h we should stick to the same 
format as block_int.h? I am not sure though.

Thank you,
Emanuele